Thomas v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Thomas’s convictions and sentences, concluding that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient and that the trial court properly denied his new-trial and mistrial motions. It also held that the second custodial interview did not require renewed warnings after a two-hour break, and that Thomas failed to establish prejudice from any deficient performance by counsel. The court rejected cumulative-prejudice relief because there were no multiple errors to consider collectively.